Pledge of Allegiance
June-27th-2002, 04:40 AM
#16
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 227
"And I think people do care. Do you run around throwing around racial slurs at people? I bet not. Sure it's just words, but those words mean something to a lot of people" --Pro_fan
"I sure don't. Throwing around racial slurs to people is totally different from the "Under God" phrase. There's no comparison at all." --flip703
Mr. 703, I think Mr. Fan was just trying to make a point.
Certainly, most people are not going to argue that the words "under God," in and of themselves, are as offensive as a racial slur.
The point was about the POWER that words can have.
Why did the federal court spend any time at all ruling on this?
Why are any of us in this forum debating this?
If words DIDN'T have that power, we wouldn't be.
"hmmm, all these babies crying about whether or not my child should have to say "the pledge" should just shut the f#ck up and concentrate on more important issues. What would those be you ask?
-gun control
-violence (sex, racial, bullying)
-drugs
-actually preparing our kids to worry and b!tch about important issues
No one forces anyone to say the pledge. and believe me, these kids hear a lot worse than "under God"..." ---onehawaiian
Mr. Hawaiian:
Of course, we have many more crucial issues facing us as a society. And yes, kids are exposed to so much today, stuff that might be considered far more offensive than those two words.
But part of "preparing our kids to worry and bitch about important issues" includes teaching them to think about what they are saying. Goes back to Mr. Fan's argument about racial slurs.
And yes, in most places, kids are allowed to refrain from saying the Pledge in school...but what message is that sending to the kids? To their peers?
"Oh, you weird religious fanatic/rabid atheist--you don't love your country as much as I do."
There is absolutely no good reason why patriotism and religion should have anything to do with one another.
"In Dale We Trust!!!" ---ZoomZoomH
That's right, baby...and don't you forget it!!
"I sure don't. Throwing around racial slurs to people is totally different from the "Under God" phrase. There's no comparison at all." --flip703
Mr. 703, I think Mr. Fan was just trying to make a point.
Certainly, most people are not going to argue that the words "under God," in and of themselves, are as offensive as a racial slur.
The point was about the POWER that words can have.
Why did the federal court spend any time at all ruling on this?
Why are any of us in this forum debating this?
If words DIDN'T have that power, we wouldn't be.
"hmmm, all these babies crying about whether or not my child should have to say "the pledge" should just shut the f#ck up and concentrate on more important issues. What would those be you ask?
-gun control
-violence (sex, racial, bullying)
-drugs
-actually preparing our kids to worry and b!tch about important issues
No one forces anyone to say the pledge. and believe me, these kids hear a lot worse than "under God"..." ---onehawaiian
Mr. Hawaiian:
Of course, we have many more crucial issues facing us as a society. And yes, kids are exposed to so much today, stuff that might be considered far more offensive than those two words.
But part of "preparing our kids to worry and bitch about important issues" includes teaching them to think about what they are saying. Goes back to Mr. Fan's argument about racial slurs.
And yes, in most places, kids are allowed to refrain from saying the Pledge in school...but what message is that sending to the kids? To their peers?
"Oh, you weird religious fanatic/rabid atheist--you don't love your country as much as I do."
There is absolutely no good reason why patriotism and religion should have anything to do with one another.
"In Dale We Trust!!!" ---ZoomZoomH
That's right, baby...and don't you forget it!!
June-27th-2002, 06:05 AM
#17
**Punani Lover**
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hawaii (duh!)
Posts: 1,861
i hear what you are saying, but let's face it, it's way out of hand. we're talking about a time-honored pledge that DOES NOT hurt anyone.
on september 11th, did anyone b!tch when school kids sang "America the Beautiful", or "God Bless America"? (when the congressmen and senators sang on the steps of the capital)
hmmm. is that what we need to put aside such petty issues, another attack on our beloved country?
kids here refrain from saying the pledge and no one bothers them. whether it be a patriotic issue or religous, kids more-or-less don't even care about the pledge anyways since they barely understand what it is they are pledging for.
as far as "no good reason", the fact that this country was founded on christian principles is a good enough reason. why dishonor all that they fought and worked for?
i'm not fighting for/against this issue, i am stating that this is a very petty issue that doesn't hurt anyone as it is not forcing anyone to believe in a certain religion or even to recite the pledge. i'm just saying focus all this energy on something a little more positive instead of something that will raise little debates in a forum dedicated to cars.
on september 11th, did anyone b!tch when school kids sang "America the Beautiful", or "God Bless America"? (when the congressmen and senators sang on the steps of the capital)
hmmm. is that what we need to put aside such petty issues, another attack on our beloved country?
And yes, in most places, kids are allowed to refrain from saying the Pledge in school...but what message is that sending to the kids? To their peers?
"Oh, you weird religious fanatic/rabid atheist--you don't love your country as much as I do."
There is absolutely no good reason why patriotism and religion should have anything to do with one another.
"Oh, you weird religious fanatic/rabid atheist--you don't love your country as much as I do."
There is absolutely no good reason why patriotism and religion should have anything to do with one another.
as far as "no good reason", the fact that this country was founded on christian principles is a good enough reason. why dishonor all that they fought and worked for?
i'm not fighting for/against this issue, i am stating that this is a very petty issue that doesn't hurt anyone as it is not forcing anyone to believe in a certain religion or even to recite the pledge. i'm just saying focus all this energy on something a little more positive instead of something that will raise little debates in a forum dedicated to cars.
June-27th-2002, 09:17 AM
#18
Hey Bartender
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The WDM
Posts: 1,122
1. God
a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
5. A very handsome man.
6. A powerful ruler or despot.
you dont have to link god to just one faith. the only people that this does work for is atheist. so in that reason yeah maybe it should be dropped.
a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
5. A very handsome man.
6. A powerful ruler or despot.
you dont have to link god to just one faith. the only people that this does work for is atheist. so in that reason yeah maybe it should be dropped.
Last edited by islandpro; June-27th-2002 at 09:46 AM.
June-27th-2002, 10:26 AM
#19
Cripple Fight!!!!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,944
Originally posted by islandpro
1. God
a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
5. A very handsome man.
6. A powerful ruler or despot.
you dont have to link god to just one faith. the only people that this does work for is atheist. so in that reason yeah maybe it should be dropped.
1. God
a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
5. A very handsome man.
6. A powerful ruler or despot.
you dont have to link god to just one faith. the only people that this does work for is atheist. so in that reason yeah maybe it should be dropped.
Let's just watch and see how the Supreme Court will rule on this when it gets there
Last edited by ZoomZoomH; June-27th-2002 at 10:28 AM.
June-27th-2002, 11:30 AM
#20
Hey Bartender
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The WDM
Posts: 1,122
Originally posted by ZoomZoomH
also people of POLYTHEISTIC faiths (e.g. Hinduism, Taoism, Buddhism) may be uncomfortable with the declaration of a singular omnipotent being.
Let's just watch and see how the Supreme Court will rule on this when it gets there
also people of POLYTHEISTIC faiths (e.g. Hinduism, Taoism, Buddhism) may be uncomfortable with the declaration of a singular omnipotent being.
Let's just watch and see how the Supreme Court will rule on this when it gets there
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
June-27th-2002, 11:47 AM
#21
Hey Bartender
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The WDM
Posts: 1,122
Originally posted by PseudoRealityX
What about ognostics and atheists? are we just going to **** them because they decided that the earth REALLY IS 4 billion years old?
What about ognostics and atheists? are we just going to **** them because they decided that the earth REALLY IS 4 billion years old?
nooooo jesse i thought out anyone you would atleast read each post.
originally posted by me
the only people that this does work for is atheist.
the only people that this does work for is atheist.
Last edited by islandpro; June-27th-2002 at 11:55 AM.
June-27th-2002, 12:11 PM
#23
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Originally posted by islandpro
no it still works for them in a way. look past section A and on to the rest.
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
no it still works for them in a way. look past section A and on to the rest.
b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
"b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being .
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol. supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god. "
So you see according to this definition, there is ONE God and not many, and therefore this definition cannot apply to polytheistic If you capitalize God you are talking about "the Lord Almighty", but if you are talking gods as in Zeus and Posseidon, then it is all lower case.
June-27th-2002, 12:24 PM
#26
Passion for Zoom Zoom!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 372
Hmmm...
We have a faction that believes we shouldn't have "under God" in the Pledge and that we shouldn't have "In God We Trust" on our currency and that we shouldn't be forced upon Christian prayer at events and ceremonies.
We have a faction that believes we should have "under God" in the Pledge and that we should have "In God We Trust" on our currency and that we should be forced upon Christian prayer at events and ceremonies.
We have a faction that believes it doesn't matter either way.
And, it's starting to become a somewhat heated debate.
This is precisely why we have the Separation of Church and State and the Freedom of Religion. Can you imagine if Congress sat and debated over what religion they should force upon the people? We would probably have a massacre in the Capitol building because people can get very heated when debating who is right about what deity that does or does not exist. Our forefathers were very smart, indeed.
The Constitution exists for a reason. It cannot and may not change to suit the political desires of the current administration. It stands to provide a common basis for the how the nation is run. The Freedom of Religion and the Separation of Church and State is very key to our form of government. So is the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, which I see the same people who want to take away the first amendment also would like to see the second amendment go. What's next? Shall we just burn the Constitution and we'll form a dictatorship run by the Church? Oh wait, that's exactly what our forefathers shed blood revolting against!
-Jerry
We have a faction that believes we shouldn't have "under God" in the Pledge and that we shouldn't have "In God We Trust" on our currency and that we shouldn't be forced upon Christian prayer at events and ceremonies.
We have a faction that believes we should have "under God" in the Pledge and that we should have "In God We Trust" on our currency and that we should be forced upon Christian prayer at events and ceremonies.
We have a faction that believes it doesn't matter either way.
And, it's starting to become a somewhat heated debate.
This is precisely why we have the Separation of Church and State and the Freedom of Religion. Can you imagine if Congress sat and debated over what religion they should force upon the people? We would probably have a massacre in the Capitol building because people can get very heated when debating who is right about what deity that does or does not exist. Our forefathers were very smart, indeed.
The Constitution exists for a reason. It cannot and may not change to suit the political desires of the current administration. It stands to provide a common basis for the how the nation is run. The Freedom of Religion and the Separation of Church and State is very key to our form of government. So is the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, which I see the same people who want to take away the first amendment also would like to see the second amendment go. What's next? Shall we just burn the Constitution and we'll form a dictatorship run by the Church? Oh wait, that's exactly what our forefathers shed blood revolting against!
-Jerry
June-27th-2002, 12:27 PM
#27
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Originally posted by PseudoRealityX
yup yup, im in agreeance with ya there. I was just making a generalization more than specifying an exact number.
4,000,000,000 is still more than 6000 in my book
yup yup, im in agreeance with ya there. I was just making a generalization more than specifying an exact number.
4,000,000,000 is still more than 6000 in my book
Why God why????
June-27th-2002, 12:40 PM
#28
Hey Bartender
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The WDM
Posts: 1,122
Originally posted by Pro_fan
I don't think that it does work for them. Look at the wording of the definitions:
"b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being .
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol. supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god. "
So you see according to this definition, there is ONE God and not many, and therefore this definition cannot apply to polytheistic If you capitalize God you are talking about "the Lord Almighty", but if you are talking gods as in Zeus and Posseidon, then it is all lower case.
I don't think that it does work for them. Look at the wording of the definitions:
"b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being .
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol. supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god. "
So you see according to this definition, there is ONE God and not many, and therefore this definition cannot apply to polytheistic If you capitalize God you are talking about "the Lord Almighty", but if you are talking gods as in Zeus and Posseidon, then it is all lower case.
June-27th-2002, 12:56 PM
#29
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Originally posted by islandpro
where does it say that you cant have more the one.
where does it say that you cant have more the one.
It says "of THIS being"...that is singular.
It says "A being"...again singular
It says "An image of A supernatural being" <---singular
It says "ONE that is worshipped". <----Need I point it out again?
These are all singular, referring to ONE GOD.
Look, I'm just messing around with semantics here. Basically, if you talk about God (capital G) you mean Judeo-christianity's God.
If you say god (ie. He was the god of thunder, or the gods gathered around the oracle), then you mean that there is more than one being.
Last edited by Pro_fan; June-27th-2002 at 12:59 PM.
June-27th-2002, 01:18 PM
#30
Hey Bartender
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The WDM
Posts: 1,122
Originally posted by Pro_fan
Sigh....
It says "of THIS being"...that is singular.
It says "A being"...again singular
It says "An image of A supernatural being" <---singular
It says "ONE that is worshipped". <----Need I point it out again?
These are all singular, referring to ONE GOD.
Look, I'm just messing around with semantics here. Basically, if you talk about God (capital G) you mean Judeo-christianity's God.
If you say god (ie. He was the god of thunder, or the gods gathered around the oracle), then you mean that there is more than one being.
Sigh....
It says "of THIS being"...that is singular.
It says "A being"...again singular
It says "An image of A supernatural being" <---singular
It says "ONE that is worshipped". <----Need I point it out again?
These are all singular, referring to ONE GOD.
Look, I'm just messing around with semantics here. Basically, if you talk about God (capital G) you mean Judeo-christianity's God.
If you say god (ie. He was the god of thunder, or the gods gathered around the oracle), then you mean that there is more than one being.
also i dont think that is true. not all the time when someone talks about God do they mean Judeo-christianity's God. i dont.
Last edited by islandpro; June-27th-2002 at 01:20 PM.